Matthew Reed practices primarily in the area of product liability litigation, representing drug and medical device manufacturers in state and federal litigation across the country. He also litigates complex business matters on behalf of clients in a variety of industries. His recent efforts encompass a broad spectrum of motion and briefing practice, including post-trial and appellate work.
Matthew Reed practices primarily in the area of product liability litigation, representing drug and medical device manufacturers in state and federal litigation across the country. He also litigates complex business matters on behalf of clients in a variety of industries. His recent efforts encompass a broad spectrum of motion and briefing practice, including post-trial and appellate work.
As the lead associate on the motion and briefing team for national coordinating counsel in multi-state medical products liability litigation, he has drafted successful motions for summary judgment, motions in limine, and trial briefs in state and federal courts around the nation. He is familiar with state and federal complex litigation procedures, having contributed prevailing briefing in federal Multi-District Litigation (“MDL”) proceedings, as well as oppositions to consolidation in the state court context. He also has experience managing local counsel’s motion work and case handling.
Mr. Reed has extensive experience challenging and defending expert witnesses, having drafted and opposed numerous Daubert motions and motions to strike against a diverse range of medical and regulatory experts. His motions have secured the exclusion or limitation of key opposing experts in vanguard federal court litigation. He has also worked with co-defense counsel to coordinate nationwide Daubert strategy.
As the lead associate on post-appeal, state trial court briefing, Mr. Reed drafted a successful motion for contractual attorney fees in the amount of $1.5 million, despite an appellate decision affirming judgment against his client on all causes of action except the contract claim. The success of the motion provided the client the right to recoup an additional $1.3 million in attorney fees already paid to the opposing party. He also drafted motions to amend the judgment and for restitution, which the client leveraged for a favorable settlement of associated litigation.
Mr. Reed also has federal and state court appellate experience. He has drafted the respondent’s brief to the 9th Circuit in an appeal from a district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of his client. He has also drafted the respondent’s brief and a motion to dismiss in an appeal from a state court trial verdict in favor of his client, a law firm. The appellate court upheld the verdict in his client’s favor in its entirety, and the state supreme court denied petition for review.
Affiliations, Activities and Accomplishments
At Pepperdine University Law School, he was a Note & Comment Editor of the Pepperdine Law Review, a member of the Moot Court Team, and president of the Christian Legal Society.
Presentations and Publications
- “Ninth Circuit Reiterates That Knowledge of Off-Label Use Doesn't Equal Illegal Promotion of It,” Sedgwick’s Issue Tracker (March 2010).